Improving fatigue performance of Ti-6Al-4V alloy via ultrasonic surface rolling process

doi:10.1016/j.jmst.2019.03.036

Abstract

Abstract:

The effect of a gradient nanostructured (GNS) surface layer obtained by ultrasonic surface rolling process (USRP) on the fatigue behavior of Ti-6Al-4 V alloy has been studied in this paper. Microstructure, surface topography, surface roughness and residual stress measurements were performed to characterize the surface under different conditions. Rotating bending fatigue tests were carried out to evaluate the fatigue behavior of different treatments. The results present a remarkable fatigue performance enhancement for the Ti-6Al-4 V alloy with a GNS surface layer obtained by application of USRP with respect to the untreated condition, notwithstanding its considerable surface roughness due to severe ultrasonic impacts and extrusions. Mechanical surface polishing treatment further enhances the beneficial effects of USRP on the fatigue performance. The significantly improved fatigue performance can mainly be ascribed to the compressive residual stress. Simultaneously, the GNS surface layer and surface work hardening have a synergistic effect that accompanies the effect of compressive residual stress.

Key words: Ultrasonic surface rolling process, Fatigue, Compressive residual stress, Gradient nanostructured surface layer, Ti-6Al-4V alloy

Chengsong Liu, Daoxin Liu, Xiaohua Zhang, Dan Liu, Amin Ma, Ni Ao, Xingchen Xu. Improving fatigue performance of Ti-6Al-4V alloy via ultrasonic surface rolling process[J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2019, 35(8): 1555-1562.

Figures/Tables 12

Fig. 1. SEM (a) and TEM (b) images of original Ti-6Al-4V alloy before USRP.

Table 1 Main mechanical properties of Ti-6Al-4 V alloy used in this work.

Material	Yield strength (MPa)	Tensile strength (MPa)	Elongation (%)	Reduction in area (%)
Ti-6Al-4V	1010	1080	14	41

Fig. 2. Shape and dimension of fatigue specimen of Ti-6Al-4 V alloy (unit: mm).

Fig. 3. Cross-sectional SEM morphologies of USRP specimen.

Fig. 4. TEM micrographs at depth of 10 μm below USRP specimen surface: (a) bright-field image with inset showing corresponding SAED pattern; (b) dark-field image.

Fig. 5. 3D topographies (a, d), surface topographies (b, e) and cross-sectional topographies (c, f) with treatments of BM (a-c) and USRP (d-f).

Fig. 6. Surface roughness of BM and USRP specimens.

Fig. 7. Variations in residual stress and microhardness distribution of USRP specimen.

Fig. 8. S/N curves for BM and USRP conditions. Run-outs are indicated by arrows.

Fig. 9. 3D topography (a) and surface topography (b) of USRP + P specimen.

Fig. 10. (a) Surface microhardness and surface residual stress of different treatment specimens and (b) fatigue life of corresponding specimens in Fig. 10(a).

Fig. 11. Fatigue fracture morphologies with different conditions under maximum stress level of 700 MPa.

References

[1]	A.M. Ma, D.X. Liu, C.B. Tang, X.H. Zhang, C.S. Liu, Tribol. Int. 125 (2018) 85-94.
[2]	R.K. Nalla, J.P. Campbell, R.O. Ritchie, Int. J. Fatigue 24 (2002) 1047-1062.
[3]	M.A.S. Torres, H.J.C. Voorwald, Int. J. Fatigue 24 (2002) 877-886.
[4]	C.F. Yao, D.X. Wu, L.F. Ma, L. Tan, Z. Zhou, J.Y. Zhang, Appl. Surf. Sci. 387 (2016) 1257-1264.
[5]	S. Bagherifard, M. Guagliano, Eng. Fract. Mech. 81 (2012) 56-68.
[6]	S. Bagherifard, I. Fernandez-Pariente, R. Ghelichi, M. Guagliano, Int. J. Fatigue 65 (2014) 64-70.
[7]	T. Roland, D. Retraint, K. Lu, J. Lu, Scr. Mater. 54 (2006) 1949-1954.
[8]	H.W. Huang, Z.B. Wang, J. Lu, K. Lu, Acta Mater. 87 (2015) 150-160.
[9]	X. Chen, Z. Han, X.Y. Li, K. Lu, Sci. Adv. 2 (2016), e1601942.
[10]	L. Yang, N.R. Tao, K. Lu, L. Lu, Scr. Mater. 68 (2013) 801-804.
[11]	C. Wang, X.J. Shen, Z.B. An, L.C. Zhou, Y. Chai, Mater. Des. 89 (2016) 582-588.
[12]	S. Kumar, K. Chattopadhyay, G.S. Mahobia, V. Singh, Mater. Des. 110 (2016) 196-206.
[13]	S. Kumar, K. Chattopadhyay, V. Singh, J. Alloys. Compd. 724 (2017) 187-197.
[14]	Y.Y. Feng, S.S. Hu, D.P. Wang, L. Cui, Mater. Des. 89 (2016) 507-515.
[15]	M. Malaki, H.T. Ding, Mater. Des. 87 (2015) 1072-1086.
[16]	K. Lu, Science 345 (2014) 1455-1456.
[17]	K. Lu, J. Lu, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 375 (2004) 38-45.
[18]	N. Ao, D.X. Liu, C.S. Liu, X.H. Zhang, D. Liu, Mater. Charact. 145 (2018) 527-533.
[19]	Q.L. Zhang, Z.Q. Hu, W.W. Su, H.L. Zhou, C.X. Liu, Y.L. Yang, X.W. Qi, Surf. Coat. Technol. 321 (2017) 64-73.
[20]	D. Liu, D.X. Liu, X.H. Zhang, C.S. Liu, N. Ao, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 726 (2018) 69-81.
[21]	Y. Ye, S.Z.K. Chu, Z. Sun, X. Li, H. Wang, G. Tang, Mater. Des. 149 (2018) 214-227.
[22]	T. Wang, D.P. Wang, G. Liu, B.M. Gong, N.X. Song, Appl. Surf. Sci. 255 (2008) 1824-1829.
[23]	L.X. Lu, J. Sun, L. Li, Q.C. Xiong, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 87 (2016) 2533-2539.
[24]	C.S. Liu, D.X. Liu, X.H. Zhang, S.M. Yu, W.D. Zhao, Materials 10 (2017) 833-844.
[25]	X.H. Zhao, G.L. Xue, Y. Liu, Results Phys. 7 (2017) 1845-1851.
[26]	C. Ye, A. Telang, A.S. Gill, S. Suslov, Y. Idell, K. Zweiacker, J.M.K. Wiezorek, Z. Zhou, D. Qian, S.R. Mannava, V.K. Vasudevan, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 613 (2014) 274-288.
[27]	X.H. Zhao, Y.J. Fan, H.Y. Wang, Y. Liu, Mater. Lett. 160 (2015) 51-54.
[28]	H.M. Li, Y.G. Liu, M.Q. Li, H.J. Liu, Appl. Surf. Sci. 357 (2015) 197-203.
[29]	Y. Liu, D.P. Wang, C.Y. Deng, L.Q. Xia, L.X. Huo, L.J. Wang, B.M. Gong, Int. J. Fatigue 66 (2014) 155-160.
[30]	J.Z. Lu, L.J. Wu, G.F. Sun, K.Y. Luo, Y.K. Zhang, J. Cai, X.M. Luo, Acta Mater. 127 (2017) 252-266.
[31]	S.M. Yu, D.X. Liu, X.H. Zhang, D.X. Du, Appl. Surf. Sci. 353 (2015) 995-1002.
[32]	K. Li, X.S. Fu, R.D. Li, P.T. Gai, Z.Q. Li, W.L. Zhou, G.Q. Chen, Int. J. Fatigue 85 (2016) 65-69.
[33]	K. Kubiak, S. Fouvry, A.M. Marechal, J.M. Vernet, Surf. Coat. Technol. 201 (2006) 4323-4328.
[34]	I. Altenberger, R.K. Nalla, Y. Sano, L. Wagner, R.O. Ritchie, Int. J. Fatigue 44 (2012) 292-302.
[35]	A.I. Dekhtyar, B.N. Mordyuk, D.G. Savvakin, V.I. Bondarchuk, I.V. Moiseeva, N.I. Khripta, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 641 (2015) 348-359.
[36]	C. Correa, L.R. de Lara, M. Díaz, A. Gil-Santos, J.A. Porro, J.L. Ocaña, Int. J. Fatigue 79 (2015) 1-9.
[37]	J.C. Kim, S.K. Cheong, H. Noguchi, Int. J. Fatigue 56 (2013) 114-122.
[38]	X.H. Zhang, D.X. Liu, Int. J. Fatigue 31 (2009) 889-893.
[39]	R.K. Nalla, I. Altenberger, U. Noster, G.Y. Liu, B. Scholtes, R.O. Ritchie, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 355 (2003) 216-230.
[40]	M.Z. Ge, J.Y. Xiang, J. Alloys. Compd. 680 (2016) 544-552.
[41]	Q. Wang, X.S. Liu, Z.J. Yan, Z.B. Dong, D.J. Yan, Int. J. Fatigue 105 (2017) 43-59.
[42]	S. Bagherifard, I. Fernandez-Pariente, R. Ghelichi, M. Guagliano, Mater. Des. 45 (2013) 497-503.
[43]	J.C. Kim, S.K. Cheong, H. Noguchi, Int. J. Fatigue 55 (2013) 147-157.
[44]	H. Lee, S. Mall, H. Soyama, Tribol. Lett. 36 (2009) 89-94.
[45]	M.S. Pham, S.R. Holdsworth, Int. J. Fatigue 51 (2013) 36-48.
[46]	K.S. Chan, Int. J. Fatigue 32 (2010) 1428-1447.
[47]	M.D. Sangid, Int. J. Fatigue 57 (2013) 58-72.
[48]	K.H. Hwang, M.R. Plichta, J.K. Lee, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 114 (1989) 61-72.
[49]	H.W. Huang, Z.B. Wang, X.P. Yong, K. Lu, Mater. Sci. Technol. 29 (2013) 1200-1205.
[50]	J. Dong, W.C. Liu, X. Song, P. Zhang, W.J. Ding, A.M. Korsunsky, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 527 (2010) 6053-6063.
[51]	D.X. Liu, J.W. He, Acta Metall. Sin. 37 (2001) 156-160 (in Chinese).